V5 Documentation - DVLA Rule Change for Motor Caravan Reregistration June 2019

[Martinf]

I smell a rat here

Motor caravan’ is the only body type description at DVLAs disposal to describe vehicles converted after first registration

What has time of registration to do with the appearance? It is saying that if it’s converted before registration it can be a motor caravan, and if afterwards it can’t?

This seems to point to precisely the VED reason I suggest above! Convert before first registration as a motor caravan and pay higher VED or if converted later on a lower VED vehicle then you can’t reclassify.

 

[Rich N]

Thank you Frank Fisher for your detailed post - I'm just in the middle of composing a complaint so it will give me food for thought. Their FOI response gives rise to more questions than answers for me - for example, if they are refusing to reclassify a double decker bus that is no longer capable of being used as a PCV, what exactly is it now, how could anyone hope to insure it and would people's driving licences allow them to actually drive it ? The same would apply for any converted truck (especially over 7.5T). For the Police, I would have thought that reclassification of converted vans to a motor caravan would have been a good thing - after all camper vans generally have gas cylinders or LPG tanks on board whereas your average courier delivery van would not so in the event of an accident, wouldn't the M1 classification be quite important (if the Police were to PNC the van)? If they have no current descriptor then surely they can add another one (after all they've suggested two in their reply)? The 'reasonableness test' is an interesting one and very subjective - all my friends who have seen the van have said 'that's a nice campervan' not one has said 'that's a nice van with windows'! I rather think Martin F has nailed the true reason in his post above.

 

[James1000]

Bad news. The DVLA have now confirmed in writing in response to an FOI request that they will not be reclassifying ANY aftermarket or home-made conversions as motor caravans. They will only classify brand new unregistered vehicles and "coach built" vehicles. They have cooked up this change in collusion with the police - there is no legislative change, it's an internal policy decision. That means it may be easier to get MPs to bring pressure to bear - this needs a political campaign unfortunately. DVLA response below:

The primary purpose of the vehicle registration system maintained by DVLA is for road safety and revenue collection. It is vital that we do all we can to secure and maintain the accuracy and integrity of the vehicle register. This includes accurately describing the body type of the vehicle in question to assist the police in identifying vehicles involved in criminal activity.
As you are aware DVLA have recently seen an increase in the number of applications to change the body type description on their vehicle registration certificate (V5C), including converted single or double decker buses and heavy goods delivery vehicles, to what the customer describes as motor caravan. Whilst the interior of these vehicles may have been fitted with basic living facilities, the external appearance of these vehicles remains as they were constructed.
Unfortunately, there is no body type descriptor ‘living van’ or ‘camper van’ which could in some cases describe the majority of self/professional conversions of goods vehicles. ‘Motor caravan’ is the only body type description at DVLAs disposal to describe vehicles converted after first registration, either professionally or by the keeper and even those that are originally manufactured as motor caravans.
Whilst the internal specifications of a vehicle which has been converted as a 'Motor caravan' are easily defined, when describing the external appearance DVLA applies a 'reasonableness test' which is based on how someone would describe the vehicle in traffic or if parked on the road i.e. if you saw a Ford Transit with a window for example would you describe it as a 'van' or a 'motor caravan'?
As a result DVLA has reviewed the use of the body type descriptor ‘motor caravan’ in conjunction with the Police to ensure it accurately describes vehicles externally. The Police fully support the ‘reasonableness test’ and are of the opinion that if a vehicle is not first registered as a motor caravan or does not have a custom coach built body, it should not be described as a ‘motor caravan’. This means that all goods vehicles fitted with basic living facilities should be described externally as panel van, van with side windows or other relevant body type description. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pictures_of_motor_caravan​

What is the definition of ‘COACH BUILT’???

Isn’t that every converter?

 

[Loz]

I always understood it as, Coach builders take delivery of a non-registered chassis then put on their design of body on it and get it IVA/SVA'd and registered.

 

[Long tall John]

Not blaming you for anything at all @oldiebut goodie, unless you work for the DVLA?
Really don’t want anyone stuck behind me on the A9, that includes you.

Should you find a definition of what a motorcaravan looks like do please forward it.

Surely if the emergency services were that concerned about vehicles carrying gas they would legislate mandatory placards externally. They don’t, therefore they don’t care that much?

Not blaming you for anything at all @oldiebut goodie, unless you work for the DVLA?
Really don’t want anyone stuck behind me on the A9, that includes you.

Should you find a definition of what a motorcaravan looks like do please forward it.

Surely if the emergency services were that concerned about vehicles carrying gas they would legislate mandatory placards externally. They don’t, therefore they don’t care that much?

 

[Bargy62]

View attachment 51028

I would understand that to mean vehicle constructed ie built from new
Not converted after registration
And the argument goes on

 

[andys]

No point in trying to prove a case one way or another on this forum, nobody that makes relevant decisions is reading it. Seems it’s done and they’re not going to change their mind so we need to look at a future where you can’t change the category of your van once registered.
As has been mentioned, the plus point will be that people won’t need to fit a particular item that they won’t use, just to satisfy a tick box. Downsides are the implications on insurance, which will no doubt reduce choice and push up prices a bit in the short to medium term, but these should level out as it becomes the market norm. The speed limits are a nuisance but I wouldn’t have thought it would be the end of the world, though it’s a warped logic that limits the speed of a small van on a dual carriageway while allowing a bus, potentially full of children, to travel at 70mph in the outside lane of a motorway!
I’ve said it before, but we’re coming towards the end of the golden era of driving, every aspect will get more difficult, more restrictive and more expensive from here on in.

 

[FrankFisher]

Yep, the ongoing agenda on the roads - and everywhere else for that matter - is about control, restriction, conformity.... I guess that is what "diversity" and "equality" is all about.

However, wrt this specific issue, I think enough MPs can be agitated to do something about this. They do not like agencies or quangos making up the law as they go along. If everyone who has been knocked back pursues the FULL DVLA appeals process, and then immediately writes to their MP, we may get a reversal on this.

 

[andys]

Yep, the ongoing agenda on the roads - and everywhere else for that matter - is about control, restriction, conformity.... I guess that is what "diversity" and "equality" is all about.

However, wrt this specific issue, I think enough MPs can be agitated to do something about this. They do not like agencies or quangos making up the law as they go along. If everyone who has been knocked back pursues the FULL DVLA appeals process, and then immediately writes to their MP, we may get a reversal on this.

Yes maybe. If it's an admin cost issue then I doubt most people would object to a £50-100 one-off fee to change designation. To be honest I don't think many MPs will be interested in taking it up when everything's up in the air and they may not have their seat in 1/3/12 months. They need heartwarming, baby kissing PR in their local paper not something to do with fossil fuel vehicles which may well come back and bite them on the ass.

 

[FrankFisher]

Yes maybe. If it's an admin cost issue then I doubt most people would object to a £50-100 one-off fee to change designation. To be honest I don't think many MPs will be interested in taking it up when everything's up in the air and they may not have their seat in 1/3/12 months. They need heartwarming, baby kissing PR in their local paper not something to do with fossil fuels vehicle which may well come back and bite them on the ass.

Now more than every they need *votes*, and they need to show that they are doing their actual job. I think the current chaos works to our advantage.

 

[Bargy62]

Now more than every they need *votes*, and they need to show that they are doing their actual job. I think the current chaos works to our advantage.

I reckon few MPs would be interested just think how many in a constituency have the MOTORHOME problem compared to a real problem

 

[FrankFisher]

Well, how many go fox hunting? How many have motorbikes? Most people do not organise to fight injustices - they say "what's the point, it will happen anyway?". But I have been involved in many campaigns in fields like motorcycling, raves, shooting etc where pressure on MPs *has* had results. If an MP gets ten letters on a subject he takes notice.

 

[Bargy62]

well frank it looks like you agreed with my point
where I live Dartford there may be 1 person with the MOTORHOME issue
But there are probably a few hundred that have got the ump with the boy racers using the town centre as a race track
The congestion the Dartford crossing creates in the town
I could probably get hundreds of people to sign a petition for both these issues
and spend a whole day and get 5 signatures that felt van to campervan owners are hard done by the DVLA actually going along with the rules they created.

I'm sure insurance companies will do similar to Adrian flux and do basic van insurance with the addition of agreed valuation as they did with my van
so a conversion will be a van with windows send off pictures and details they ask for, they assess it you get agreed valuation 0f 43k or whatever you think its worth its like gap insurance.

 

[Slw66]

Ah, clearly I’m not sure, appears the only way for cheaper insurance, tolls, car speeds is either the unattainable MC or MPV as body type, anyone know any other way for converted PV’s?

Like the look of the shuttle as we have T28 Swb but hoping our next van will be an elec one.

We love our van tho and as TSi bmt complies with the ulez which we will soon live in, the tax is as per co2 emissions so not much more than my old 320d touring was that the van replaced and speed limits/tolls we can tolerate...just the insurance to tackle now, Adrian Flux, any one else had experience with them?

Thank you Frank Fisher for your detailed post - I'm just in the middle of composing a complaint so it will give me food for thought. Their FOI response gives rise to more questions than answers for me - for example, if they are refusing to reclassify a double decker bus that is no longer capable of being used as a PCV, what exactly is it now, how could anyone hope to insure it and would people's driving licences allow them to actually drive it ? The same would apply for any converted truck (especially over 7.5T). For the Police, I would have thought that reclassification of converted vans to a motor caravan would have been a good thing - after all camper vans generally have gas cylinders or LPG tanks on board whereas your average courier delivery van would not so in the event of an accident, wouldn't the M1 classification be quite important (if the Police were to PNC the van)? If they have no current descriptor then surely they can add another one (after all they've suggested two in their reply)? The 'reasonableness test' is an interesting one and very subjective - all my friends who have seen the van have said 'that's a nice campervan' not one has said 'that's a nice van with windows'! I rather think Martin F has nailed the true reason in his post above.

Got two letters in response to my second, both with a V5 each, still van with side windows, each letter using a diferent excuse for the external minutae that they don't publish (safety, police id, revenues, criminal activity blah blah) have sent them both back saying unhappy that website gives impression that MC classification is still available and no details of the sinister, mysterious and subjective "external features" they refer to. They keep saying my van can't be identified as a MC but I have many examples of vans with out pop tops that are MC. Contradictory and discriminatory let alone the financial loss (value cr*p without MC). Have banged on about needed to tell us so we could have made informed decisions (not buy non MC vans) but have plunged me into personal financial loss and stress/health issue. Any company refusing to advise/publish such serious info to general public would be done by Tradeing Standards/Financial Ombudsman for misleading and deceptive entrapment.....we'll see what happens, suspect no good but proper went there....wonder why they did u turn in 2011/2012 and not now? I resent having commercial vehicle fee's fausted on me without the choice to decide not to be caught, let alone my right to enjoy the same treatment as many before me #equality its a professionally permanantly converted private leisure vehicle FFS.... suggested stop allowing MC after you've advised the public accordingly so we don't get unwittingly caught/penalised in a DVLA policy change/decide to enforce again *rolling eyes so hard I can't see*

 

[FrankFisher]

Write to your MP. Or to George Soros who appears to run the country. But probably your MP first. It does - or used to - often help.

 

[Slw66]

Write to your MP. Or to George Soros who appears to run the country. But probably your MP first. It does - or used to - often help.

Yes CC'd my latest letter to my MP, solicitor, friendly ex DI and conversion company, obviousy they haven't though about those of us caught by their actions we're just collateral damage it seems, why they coudln't have just posted it on their website a few months before they intende dto do it I really can't fathom

 

[FrankFisher]

Yes CC'd my latest letter to my MP, solicitor, friendly ex DI and conversion company, obviousy they haven't though about those of us caught by their actions we're just collateral damage it seems, why they coudln't have just posted it on their website a few months before they intende dto do it I really can't fathom

Well something is obviously going on that they won't let us in to, and they're not answering direct questions on police discussions via FOI. I assume it's in preparation for another tax grab, but who knows.

 

[Slw66]

Well something is obviously going on that they won't let us in to, and they're not answering direct questions on police discussions via FOI. I assume it's in preparation for another tax grab, but who knows.

Exaclty, but by not letting us know before we spend all our savings they are misleading and trapping us, well me anyway. If I'd known I may not have purchased at all...it's surely unlawful...just written a huge letter to my MP too. They shoud just honour those of us trapped and then draw a line not allow us to be fodder...

 

[Slw66]

Exaclty, but by not letting us know before we spend all our savings they are misleading and trapping us, well me anyway. If I'd known I may not have purchased at all...it's surely unlawful...just written a huge letter to my MP too. They shoud just honour those of us trapped and then draw a line not allow us to be fodder...

It's just really mean and callous

 

[Scoobied64]

Contradictory and discriminatory let alone the financial loss (value cr*p without MC).
*

I’m not trying to be provocative but will it really affect the value of a converted vehicle if it’s a “van with windows” rather than a motorcaravan on the V5? Basically it’s the same vehicle just not able to travel at 70mph on motorways and, ok it’s a big if, if the insurance companies accept it at its replacement value then it’s a name. Or am I missing something fundamental- again that’s an honest question.